Two Cases of a Prenatally Diagnosed Double Aortic Arch with Postnatal Obliteration of the Distal Left Aortic Arch
We report two cases of prenatally diagnosed double aortic arch with dominant right arch and a left-sided ductus arteriosus, consistent with a complete vascular ring. Postnatal transthoracic echocardiogram and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging demonstrated a spontaneous closure of the ductus arteriosus and obliteration of the left aortic arch distal to the origin of the left subclavian artery in both cases. Spontaneous closure of the ductus arteriosus involving extended ductal tissue in the left aortic arch likely led to obliteration of the distal left arch after birth. One patient presented with recurrent symptoms suggestive of dysphagia and underwent a successful surgical repair of the vascular ring with resolution of symptoms. The other patient has been asymptomatic and is 4 years old at the time of this report.
KeywordsVascular ring Double aortic arch Atretic left aortic arch Fetal echocardiography Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
This study has no financial aid. Authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was not obtained for this case report.
Supplementary file1 (MP4 3890 kb)
- 3.Ezon DS, Penny DJ (2016) Aortic Arch and Vascular Anomalies. In: Allen HD, Shaddy RE, Penny DJ, Feltes TF, Cetta F, (ed). Moss and Adams’ Heart Disease in Infants, Children, and Adolescents: Including the Fetus and Young Adults. 9th ed. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
- 4.Austin EH, Kavarana MN (2015) Vascular Rings, Slings, and Other Arch Anomalies. In: Kaiser LR, Kron IL, Spray TL (eds) Mastery of Cardiothoracic Surgery, 2nd edn. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 722–738Google Scholar